Sins-This Floor

William Haskins

poet
Kind Benefactor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
29,099
Reaction score
8,848
Age
58
Website
www.poisonpen.net
imagine for a moment that there is no supreme being dirtying its hands with such minor affairs and that humanity is left to its intellect and understanding to work its way through what it means to live and let live.

it's only fair to point out that the folks who are trying to argue either viewpoint from scripture look, to some, like a pack of trekkies fighting over the mispronunciation of a word in the klingon dictionary.
 

Myrealana

I aim to misbehave
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 29, 2012
Messages
5,425
Reaction score
1,911
Location
Denver, CO
Website
www.badfoodie.com
My mother and father met at the United Methodist Wesley Fellowship at college and are now on the board of directors. My father is also a deacon in his local Methodist church and together, they just took over the church's neighborhood food pantry.

They both cheerfully greeted the Supreme Court's decision, as did their pastor whose Facebook picture is currently drawn with a rainbow filter.

I'm not terribly active in the church any more, but my former pastor has posted on FB many times of his love and support for same sex couples. I once took a class from him on the interpretation of the ancient scriptures and the changes in meaning over time. He happily teaches that a monogamous, loving relationship between any two consenting adults is created in the grace of God, not in sin.

It's not OK to paint everyone with the same brush. You can't even begin to get all Christians to decide what is and isn't a sin.
 

Perks

delicate #!&@*#! flower
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
18,981
Reaction score
6,933
Location
At some altitude
Website
www.jamie-mason.com
Also, not sure if they do this anymore but as a student in grammar school, we recited the Pledge of Allegiance every morning, which is most certainly where I got the notion of "under God" from.
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

You do realize that The Pledge of Allegiance has nothing to do with the Founding Fathers, right?

Is was written in 1892, with no reference to God at all. The Pledge was amended in 1923, but still with no mention of God. It wasn't until 1954, under the efforts of President Eisenhower that 'under God" was added to the chant.

http://www.ushistory.org/documents/pledge.htm
 

Amadan

Banned
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
8,649
Reaction score
1,623
Which is the basic underlying problem that I see today. There are so many different sects of Christianity, so many churches and denominations that will "conveniently" ignore or even eliminate texts in the Bible. As a Christian, the entire Bible is relevant. This is one of the main reasons why Martin Luther broke away from the Roman Catholic Church because of how far removed they had become from the Bible. It's my opinion that if you are a Christian, you will follow the Bible, and refrain from willfully sinning. Those who willfully sin and tell themselves that God will forgive them because they are a believer are belittling the deity of God, as if God is dependent upon human whims.

So you're right: there are many "Christian" interpretations of anything. But what is the "Biblical" interpretation of it, is what should define a Christian, not opinions.

The problem with this reasoning is that every Christian who says this says it as if there is a one single objective Biblical interpretation that is correct, and then all the other ones.... that other Christians believe are the single objectively correct Biblical interpretations.

In short, every Christian is quite certain that God agrees with them. So are Muslims and Jews. Clearly, God cannot agree with all of them. How do you know he agrees with you?
 

Teinz

Back at it again.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
2,440
Reaction score
186
Location
My favourite chair by the window.
imagine for a moment that there is no supreme being dirtying its hands with such minor affairs and that humanity is left to its intellect and understanding to work its way through what it means to live and let live.

it's only fair to point out that the folks who are trying to argue either viewpoint from scripture look, to some, like a pack of trekkies fighting over the mispronunciation of a word in the klingon dictionary.

Up for a game of Klingon Boggle?
 

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
I'm not sure what the point of this thread is or where its going, but I must say I am enjoying the scenery as it gets there.


:nothing
 

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,083
Reaction score
10,781
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
imagine for a moment that there is no supreme being dirtying its hands with such minor affairs and that humanity is left to its intellect and understanding to work its way through what it means to live and let live.

it's only fair to point out that the folks who are trying to argue either viewpoint from scripture look, to some, like a pack of trekkies fighting over the mispronunciation of a word in the klingon dictionary.

I've always thought it strange that anyone would truly believe (no matter how sincerely they believe in a higher power in the universe) that any human creation could come close to encompassing everything that being wants for humanity. It also seems odd to me that a being that powerful would be worried about the small stuff, like sexual positions, how we wear our hair, or who has sex with whom. The universe is vast, and we're note even a spec of dust within in.

In fact, it seems the height of hubris to assert that we can know which scriptures are "true" and how God really wants us to interpret them. Much of the OT is laws and customs that were created and codified by a particular patriarchal culture to govern their own lives and make sense of their world and their relationship with their god of battles. It's hardly surprising that a bunch of rules that were intended to ensure procreation, inheritance, health and safety, peace within the community, economic prosperity, the care of children and so on in that world are no longer relevant. It's also unsurprising that we won't all agree about which ones still are important. Orthodox Jews still follow many of the old the dietary laws. Few Christians do anymore, in spite of their being mandated in the same books that are cited to condemn sex between men.

The New Testament was created and interpreted by humans too. Flip the dice again, and the religion could have turned out differently. Or it might not have survived at all.

I saw a documentary a while back on the early history of Christianity. So many "what ifs." So many things that could have gone differently.

This is not to say that these texts have no meaning. But much of their strength and enduring relevance stems from their flexibility. Arguing that today's multitude of faiths and interpretations of said scriptures are a bad thing while simultaneously arguing that the protestant reformation was a good thing (because Catholicism had gone astray) seems a bit, I don't know, odd. The former follows naturally from the latter. Lest we deify Martin Luther and his original intentions too much, we'd best remember that he loathed the very concept of a heliocentric universe solar system.

Great and influential religious figures can be wrong about some things. They're human. Look at our founding fathers. Some of them kept slaves, and when they wrote the constitution, slavery was still legal (and women couldn't vote). Thankfully, humans are intelligent and flexible enough to reinterpret important documents in light of new sensibilities and understandings about human worth and dignity.
 
Last edited:

Vince524

Are you gonna finish that bacon?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 8, 2010
Messages
15,903
Reaction score
4,652
Location
In a house
Website
vincentmorrone.com
imagine for a moment that there is no supreme being dirtying its hands with such minor affairs and that humanity is left to its intellect and understanding to work its way through what it means to live and let live.

it's only fair to point out that the folks who are trying to argue either viewpoint from scripture look, to some, like a pack of trekkies fighting over the mispronunciation of a word in the klingon dictionary.

Up for a game of Klingon Boggle?

oh! oh! can I play?


jIHvaD bIquv ghIj cassandra 'ach ghaH je kinda tuj. nuq ghewmey chaw'a' toH shift ngaQHa'moHwI'mey pagh reH lo' haskins guy? capitalization qar ghaH 'e' let? DaH vIHtaHbogh tlhIngan Boggle, chu' jIH, 'ach chaq ngor tienz, jI'ovlaHbe' je pongDaj chaw'a' 'oH.
 

AW Admin

Administrator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
18,772
Reaction score
6,285
it's only fair to point out that the folks who are trying to argue either viewpoint from scripture look, to some, like a pack of trekkies fighting over the mispronunciation of a word in the klingon dictionary.

what else do you think people spend years in academe for?
 

atombaby

nice & cynical
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 31, 2011
Messages
1,645
Reaction score
93
Location
NJ
Website
elldimensional.wordpress.com
In short, every Christian is quite certain that God agrees with them. So are Muslims and Jews. Clearly, God cannot agree with all of them. How do you know he agrees with you?

I can't recall the verse, but in essence, I would rather believe and follow the Bible in vain, than reject the Bible, die, and end up in Hell.

--edit: See I Corinthians 15
 
Last edited:

CassandraW

Banned
Flounced
Kind Benefactor
Joined
Feb 18, 2012
Messages
24,012
Reaction score
6,476
Location
.
I can't recall the verse, but in essence, I would rather believe and follow the Bible in vain, than reject the Bible, die, and end up in Hell.

It simplifies things if you don't believe in hell.
 

William Haskins

poet
Kind Benefactor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
29,099
Reaction score
8,848
Age
58
Website
www.poisonpen.net
I can't recall the verse, but in essence, I would rather believe and follow the Bible in vain, than reject the Bible, die, and end up in Hell.

and you should have that right. in how you conduct your life.

nobody else wants their existence dictated by your limited understanding of an old book of fairy tales.

this is the very same reason the government has ceased posting the exchange value of cows and magic beans.
 

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,083
Reaction score
10,781
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
I can't recall the verse, but in essence, I would rather believe and follow the Bible in vain, than reject the Bible, die, and end up in Hell.

Because a just and compassionate God would condemn people who use their brains to everlasting torment.

If God is that much of a jerk, how do you know the scriptures aren't the "temptation" that's been planted to lead the weak and and sinful astray? Or maybe what you think of as the correct "literal" interpretation is wrong, and you'll burn for that? Or maybe another one of the world's multitude of faiths is actually the one true religion God wants us all to follow.

With religion, at some point, everyone goes with their gut and what feels right to them. We're great at rationalizing what we feel in our heart of hearts. Own that and all its consequences. Don't blame the scriptures for some not liking gay and lesbian people when the reverse is often the case (they dislike gay and lesbian people so they give importance to the interpretation of scriptures that support this).

And I have yet to hear an argument from a Christian about why they take the anti-LGBT passages in the OT literally but not the other edicts that doesn't sound like creative reinterpretations in light of the changing needs and norms of society.

The truth seems to be that pork and mixed fiber clothing (and even divorce and remarriage) don't squick them out at a visceral level, but same-sex unions do. And that's their right, but it's not their right to dictate how others live their lives.
 
Last edited:

Don

All Living is Local
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 28, 2008
Messages
24,567
Reaction score
4,007
Location
Agorism FTW!
imagine for a moment that there is no supreme being dirtying its hands with such minor affairs and that humanity is left to its intellect and understanding to work its way through what it means to live and let live.

it's only fair to point out that the folks who are trying to argue either viewpoint from scripture look, to some, like a pack of trekkies fighting over the mispronunciation of a word in the klingon dictionary.
Nonetheless, I find The Big Bang Theory provides great comic relief.
 

atombaby

nice & cynical
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 31, 2011
Messages
1,645
Reaction score
93
Location
NJ
Website
elldimensional.wordpress.com
Because a just and compassionate God would condemn people who use their brains to everlasting torment.

If God is that much of a jerk, how do you know the scriptures aren't the "temptation" that's been planted to lead the weak and and sinful astray? Or maybe what you think of as the correct "literal" interpretation is wrong, and you'll burn for that? Or maybe another one of the world's multitude of faiths is actually the one true religion God wants us all to follow.

With religion, at some point, everyone goes with their gut and what feels right to them. We're great at rationalizing what we feel in our heart of hearts. Own that and all its consequences. Don't blame the scriptures for some not liking gay and lesbian people when the reverse is often the case (they dislike gay and lesbian people so they give importance to the interpretation of scriptures that support this).

And I have yet to hear an argument from a Christian about why they take the anti-LGBT passages in the OT literally but not the other edicts that doesn't sound like creative reinterpretations in light of the changing needs and norms of society.

The truth seems to be that pork and mixed fiber clothing (and even divorce and remarriage) don't squick them out at a visceral level, but same-sex unions do. And that's their right, but it's not their right to dictate how others live their lives.

James 4:17, "Therefore, to one who knows the right thing to do and does not do it, to him it is sin."

So I certainly do agree with you there.

The Bible makes multiple statements in opposition to homosexuality (among many many other sins). If I've insulted or offended anyone, I'm sorry. I just get miffed when a Christian claims it is okay by God's standards or claims the Bible doesn't address homosexuality when that is the farthest thing from fact. Like I've said before, I'm not condemning or condoning homosexuality; to borrow Crowley's words, "do what thou wilt." I as an individual believe it is wrong, but if another believes/feels it's okay, then so be it. Don't force it on me, I'm not forcing my religion on them. I'm merely stating the words from the Bible.

Inre your last point, read about exegesis. The whole point of Jesus coming to earth to die and be resurrected was so believers didn't have to stone people, offer sacrifices, etc. I believe I explained it before. I'm personally not aware of Christians who believe homosexuals should be stoned to death? Stoning still happens in the world today, unfortunately. As a Christian though, I certainly don't support that, and to the "Christians" who take the OT literally like that, they ought to re-read the New Testament.
 

asroc

Alex
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
1,537
Reaction score
293
I'm curious, why do you believe homosexuality is wrong? Because it says so in the Bible or are there other reasons?
 

Dreity

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
1,031
Reaction score
180
Location
Upstate NY
A Catholic priest once told me hell was for people who rejected God, and since God is love, people who still sought love even while rejecting another person's notion of God wouldn't be condemned. For this same reason, he believed very few people would actually end up in hell, since you'd have to reject the earnest pursuit of love to get there.

Clearly many members of the church hierarchy believe otherwise, but that little tidbit always stuck with me.

As I find myself flirting with faith in recent months, I'm realizing that all those years I spent trying to find a theology that both stood up to academic rigor and described a God I'd actually want to believe in were years spent focusing on the wrong thing. I know now that I'm never going to find The Ultimate Truth of the Universe in any one book. I'm never going to understand the fullness of who or what God truly is, because that's not what this life is for. But I can spend my life in humble self-reflection, working to purge myself of all the things that inhibit my ability to connect with this esoteric thing called love.

And hey, if it turns out God really is a capricious, pedantic, power-mad jerk, then it's worth suffering for an eternity if I spent a lifetime loving as honestly and purely as I knew how.

Side note, I also think that "eternal torment" is a doctrine that could only be conceived by people who don't grok just how long forever is. Or possibly, deities who have been around so long the concept has lost all meaning to them. IE, they're jerks.
 

Amadan

Banned
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
8,649
Reaction score
1,623
I can't recall the verse, but in essence, I would rather believe and follow the Bible in vain, than reject the Bible, die, and end up in Hell.


That's basically Pascal's Wager, and it's beside the point. Let's say you are persuaded by Pascal's logic. You have still chosen a particular interpretation. How do you know yours is the one that will get you into heaven? Shouldn't you follow Islam just in case they're right, and you could end up in hell for not believing in the Quran?
 

AW Admin

Administrator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
18,772
Reaction score
6,285
The Bible makes multiple statements in opposition to homosexuality (among many many other sins).

I'm going to try this again.

The Bible doesn't say squat about homosexuality. It's a modern concept from the 19th century.

The Bible refers to specific sexual acts, mostly to anal sex between men, as impure, and in the NT, as sinful.

The Bible refers to the rape/molestation/prostitution of younger men by older men as sinful.

The Bible has nothing to say about homosexuality itself. It is an alien concept for the eras of the Bible.